Arbitration and other alternatives to litigation are being used for resolution of health disputes, particularly medical malpractice. But there are no definitive analyses. Eight states have enacted malpractice reforms which include voluntary binding arbitration, and over twenty jurisdictions have pre-trial screening statutes. In addition to legislative options or requirements, arbitration and screening procedures have been adopted by professional groups, insurers and individual health providers. This study will provide a continuing research data base on arbitration legislation/regulation; plans and programs; case experience; and information on practices as well as types of health delivery organizations involved. Materials will be organized for comparison with national statistical compilations of malpractice closed cases and special studies. Coordinated statistical and operating information on time sequences, costs, and procedures will be obtained from the three major statewide arbitration programs--California, Michigan, New York--and others through insurers and sponsors. Information on plans and cases will permit evaluation of the effect of different methods on acceptance of arbitration and screening and their influence on health service and medical practice. This research program extends an ongoing exploratory study (HS 01437) under which the Association has initiated the collection and analysis of such information. The proposed research will seek to assess its significance and possible effect on malpractice policy and practices.